Case 2401812/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D Forrester v Style & Comfort Interiors Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2401812/2020
- Decision date
- 11 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D Forrester
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 5 October 2021, Employment Judge Johnson found that Mrs D Forrester had been unfairly dismissed by Style & Comfort Interiors Limited. The judgment also recorded that she was dismissed without notice or payment of notice pay.
The tribunal further found that the respondent failed to provide written reasons for dismissal and failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars. It also found that on termination the respondent had not paid one week of accrued holiday pay and had not paid accrued incentive wages of £200.
The case was listed to proceed to a remedy hearing on 2 December 2021 before Employment Judge Johnson. The written record of the decision was sent to the parties on 11 November 2021.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal stated that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and that the complaint of unfair dismissal was successful. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed without notice or payment of notice pay. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide written reasons for dismissal. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay one week of accrued holiday pay at termination. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay accrued wages relating to incentives of £200 at termination. | Upheld | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.